Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32762012›Full record

Trial reportBJS open2020

Quality of life and patient satisfaction after implant-based breast reconstruction with or without acellular dermal matrix: randomized clinical trial.

F Lohmander, J Lagergren, H Johansson, P G Roy, J Frisell, Y Brandberg

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BJS open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02061527 (Immediate Breast Reconstruction With or Without the Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02061527 nacompletednot on this map

Immediate Breast Reconstruction With or Without the Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix: A Randomized Controlled Multicenter Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorKarolinska University HospitalRan2014 to 2017Enrolled135ConditionsBreast CancerArmsReconstruction with ADM., Skin or nipple sparing mastectomy, Reconstruction with implant, Total submuscular coverage, Partial submuscular coverage
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

F LohmanderDepartment of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Section of Breast Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6299-0028
J LagergrenDepartment of Surgery, Breast Centre, Capio St Görans Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
H JohanssonDepartment of Oncology-Pathology, Cancer Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
P G RoyDepartment of Breast Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
J FrisellDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Y BrandbergDepartment of Oncology-Pathology, Cancer Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

Stockholm City Council for research (ALF)Swedish Breast Cancer Association
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcellular dermal matrix (ADM) in implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBRs) aims to improve cosmetic outcomes. Six-month data are presented from a randomized trial evaluating whether IBBR with ADM provides higher health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient-reported cosmetic outcomes compared with conventional IBBR without ADM.

methodsIn this multicentre open-label RCT, women with breast cancer planned for mastectomy with immediate IBBR in four centres in Sweden and one in the UK were allocated randomly (1 : 1) to IBBR with or without ADM. HRQoL, a secondary endpoint, was measured as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) using three validated instruments (EORTC-QLQC30, QLQ-BR23, QLQ-BRR26) at baseline and 6 months.

resultsBetween 24 April 2014 and 10 May 2017, 135 women were enrolled, of whom 64 with and 65 without ADM were included in the final analysis. At 6 months after surgery, patient-reported HRQoL, measured with generic QLQ-C30 or breast cancer-specific QLQ-BR23, was similar between the groups. For patient-reported cosmetic outcomes, two subscale items, cosmetic outcome (8·66, 95 per cent c.i. 0·46 to 16·86; P = 0·041) and problems finding a well-fitting bra (-13·21, -25·54 to -0·89; P = 0·038), yielded higher scores in favour of ADM, corresponding to a small to moderate clinical difference. None of the other 27 domains measured showed any significant differences between the groups.

conclusionIBBR with ADM was not superior in terms of higher levels of HRQoL compared with IBBR without ADM. Although two subscale items of patient-reported cosmetic outcomes favoured ADM, the majority of cosmetic items showed no significant difference between treatments at 6 months. Registration number: NCT02061527 ( www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Indexed as

Acellular DermisPatient SatisfactionQuality of LifeAdultBreast ImplantationBreast ImplantsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMastectomyMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPostoperative ComplicationsSkin TransplantationSweden

Identifiers

PMID32762012
PMCPMC7528522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.